Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone

[fs]

On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 10:20:09AM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> In the open source model, the portion of the work which is relatively
> easy gets done, but the remaining part only gets done if there is a
> huge amount of pressure to do so.  If you take a problem which occurs
> only rarely, is difficult to solve, and has only a small set of users,
> that's a classic example of something that just isn't going to get fixed
> in the open source environment.  

You are wrong. The choice of you and your team for a license is well respected
here both by the tree maintainer and its users, but we don't need to go
further into pissing on open source projects because your project wouldn't
make it if it was. I(an almost anonymous reader), and most here respect both
your work and your honesty in describing why you did it commercial but this
is one thing, and generalizing is another.

The Linux kernel by itself is a good example. It has code for things
that Microsoft will create when people need it in great extend like
ipv6, encryption API and IA-64/x64 support. Well, the examples are
numerous and I'm sure some experienced hackers can enlighten you
better.

The Grub bootloader is another example. An Open Source project that
provides support for almost any kernel there exists having command line
and autocomplete support on demand. Features that *nobody asked* but
they exist.

More experienced people on open source projects I'm sure will say "wtf,
there are plenty of better examples".

And think it otherwise. If a closed source project is more advanced on
something is a result of what *its* users want. If Microsoft is better on GUI
is a result of what its users want. The Open Source operating systems
are traditionally (as for the past 10 years) better on networking and
multiuser capabilities because what's what users want.

That of course comes into you words but the fact that most closed source
projects are indeed follow what their users want, that doesn't make a
difference.

So, if your project is better that's another thing. If you and team chose 
to make it commercial is well respected and understood. More understood
is the fact that you actuall *spend money* on it. It is a fundamental
right of yours to do what you want with your code especially when it is
a matter of personal economic health. But getting it generalised and
say that every open source project is just a hobbyish thing that is
always inferior to closed source unless 2^64 people ask for a feature?

no sir, real examples show things different.

-fs